2004 WorldNetDaily.com
The startling revelation that former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger is under criminal investigation for pocketing highly classified terrorism documents was buried on page A-16 in today's edition of the New York Times.
While the story earned front-page coverage in USA Today, America's "paper of record" ran a wire story in a small box on the bottom of its last news page in the A section, one page before the editorials.
The startling revelation that former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger is under criminal investigation for pocketing highly classified terrorism documents was buried on page A-16 in today's edition of the New York Times.
While the story earned front-page coverage in USA Today, America's "paper of record" ran a wire story in a small box on the bottom of its last news page in the A section, one page before the editorials.
http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2004/07/one_cryptic_ref.html
Here is another reference that is a lot less cryptic, and might easily prompt a many follow-up questions about documents, after-action reports, and Sandy Berger. From the footnotes on p. 482:
46. NSC email, Clarke to Kerrick,“Timeline,”Aug. 19, 1998; Samuel Berger interview (Jan. 14, 2004). We did not find documentation on the after-action review mentioned by Berger. On Vice Chairman Joseph Ralston’s mission in Pakistan, see William Cohen interview (Feb. 5, 2004). For speculation on tipping off the Taliban, see, e.g., Richard Clarke interview (Dec. 18, 2003).
And to what does footnote (46) refer? On p. 117, Chapter 4, we find this:
Later on August 20, Navy vessels in the Arabian Sea fired their cruise missiles. Though most of them hit their intended targets, neither Bin Ladin nor any other terrorist leader was killed. Berger told us that an after-action review by Director Tenet concluded that the strikes had killed 20–30 people in the camps but probably missed Bin Ladin by a few hours. Since the missiles headed for Afghanistan had had to cross Pakistan, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs was sent to meet with Pakistan’s army chief of staff to assure him the missiles were not coming from India. Officials in Washington speculated that one or another Pakistani official might have sent a warning to the Taliban or Bin Ladin. (46)
How about that? How many times have we heard Clinton say that he missed Bin Ladin by just a few hours? Yet the after-action report is missing, so the Commission relied on Sandy Berger's testimony.
My guess is that someone would have asked about that, and once on the subject of Berger and missing after-action reports, the story of the criminal investigation could hardly be kept quiet. Hence, a pre-emptive leak by someone close to the commission to avoid distraction.
Here is another reference that is a lot less cryptic, and might easily prompt a many follow-up questions about documents, after-action reports, and Sandy Berger. From the footnotes on p. 482:
46. NSC email, Clarke to Kerrick,“Timeline,”Aug. 19, 1998; Samuel Berger interview (Jan. 14, 2004). We did not find documentation on the after-action review mentioned by Berger. On Vice Chairman Joseph Ralston’s mission in Pakistan, see William Cohen interview (Feb. 5, 2004). For speculation on tipping off the Taliban, see, e.g., Richard Clarke interview (Dec. 18, 2003).
And to what does footnote (46) refer? On p. 117, Chapter 4, we find this:
Later on August 20, Navy vessels in the Arabian Sea fired their cruise missiles. Though most of them hit their intended targets, neither Bin Ladin nor any other terrorist leader was killed. Berger told us that an after-action review by Director Tenet concluded that the strikes had killed 20–30 people in the camps but probably missed Bin Ladin by a few hours. Since the missiles headed for Afghanistan had had to cross Pakistan, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs was sent to meet with Pakistan’s army chief of staff to assure him the missiles were not coming from India. Officials in Washington speculated that one or another Pakistani official might have sent a warning to the Taliban or Bin Ladin. (46)
How about that? How many times have we heard Clinton say that he missed Bin Ladin by just a few hours? Yet the after-action report is missing, so the Commission relied on Sandy Berger's testimony.
My guess is that someone would have asked about that, and once on the subject of Berger and missing after-action reports, the story of the criminal investigation could hardly be kept quiet. Hence, a pre-emptive leak by someone close to the commission to avoid distraction.
Hallelujah! Finally, 3 days later, a NY Times editorial on the incident. Of course, the crux of the piece has little in the way of criticism for Sandy Berger's actions. The Times's main problem with the affair is the timing of the leakage before the 9/11 report, and that Berger failed to notify John Kerry in advance of the probe.
What a piece of shit this newspaper has become. It is not worthy of me using it for toilet paper.
What a piece of shit this newspaper has become. It is not worthy of me using it for toilet paper.
